public inbox for gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marek Polacek <polacek@redhat.com>
To: Jason Merrill <jason@redhat.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] c++: Quash -Wdangling-reference for member operator* [PR107488]
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 15:02:25 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2QQQQtEt0s/cgmn@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7db5d94d-f75e-9387-bb43-3ccec6f7fdb3@redhat.com>

On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 02:54:12PM -0400, Jason Merrill wrote:
> On 11/1/22 18:06, Marek Polacek wrote:
> > -Wdangling-reference complains here:
> > 
> >    std::vector<int> v = ...;
> >    std::vector<int>::const_iterator it = v.begin();
> >    while (it != v.end()) {
> >      const int &r = *it++; // warning
> >    }
> > 
> > because it sees a call to
> > __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const int*, std::vector<int> >::operator*
> > which returns a reference and its argument is a TARGET_EXPR representing
> > the result of
> > __gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<const int*, std::vector<int> >::operator++
> > But 'r' above refers to one of the int elements of the vector 'v', not
> > to a temporary object.  Therefore the warning is a false positive.
> > 
> > I suppose code like the above is relatively common (the warning broke
> > cppunit-1.15.1 and a few other projects), so presumably it makes sense
> > to suppress the warning when it comes to member operator*.  In this case
> > it's defined as
> > 
> >        reference
> >        operator*() const _GLIBCXX_NOEXCEPT
> >        { return *_M_current; }
> > 
> > and I'm guessing a lot of member operator* are like that, at least when
> > it comes to iterators.  I've looked at _Fwd_list_iterator,
> > _Fwd_list_const_iterator, __shared_ptr_access, _Deque_iterator,
> > istream_iterator, etc, and they're all like that, so adding #pragmas
> > would be quite tedious.  :/
> 
> > Bootstrapped/regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, ok for trunk?
> 
> OK.

Thanks.
 
> It also occurred to me that we should avoid warning if the reference we're
> initializing is a non-const lvalue reference, which can't bind to a
> temporary.

Yup; amusingly I noticed that too while working with the reduced version
of the testcase, which I deliberately didn't end up using, and which
reduced to 'int&' rather than 'const int&'.

> Maybe also if the function returns a non-const lvalue reference.

Ok.  Expect a patch soon.

Marek


      reply	other threads:[~2022-11-03 19:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-01 22:06 Marek Polacek
2022-11-03 18:54 ` Jason Merrill
2022-11-03 19:02   ` Marek Polacek [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=Y2QQQQtEt0s/cgmn@redhat.com \
    --to=polacek@redhat.com \
    --cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=jason@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).